Letters to the Editor - Oct. 5, 2012

Friday

Oct 5, 2012 at 3:15 AMOct 5, 2012 at 6:10 AM

Romney wins

To the editor: In the presidential debate Wednesday night President Obama looked tired and almost dispirited. No wonder. For the past 4 years he's been trying to improve the economy with few successes. In fact, by many measurements, the economy and jobs market is worst. More disturbing was that President Obama had no plans for the next four years except “investing” in education, technology, etc. Money that is “invested” in these projects must be paid back by this generation through tax increases, or future generations must pay it back plus interest. Gov. Romney was articulate, energized, and presidential. While showing respect for President Obama, Gov. Romney did not shy away from pointing out inaccuracies or exaggerations made by the Obama campaign of his proposals. Gov. Romney showed a depth of knowledge that is unusual in a challenger. When President Obama asked Gov. Romney for specifics of what he would do if he repealed certain policies he had time to highlight what he would do with two. First, he has no plans to scrap all of the provisions of Dodd-Frank. He identified areas that should be eliminated and others that need further definition to implement. Regarding Obamacare, Gov. Romney identified those provisions he would retain, while pointing out the dangers of implementing the non-elected board that will come between you and your doctor in defining the appropriate treatment options for which they will pay. As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney was able to work with a largely democratic legislature in passing balanced budgets and significant legislation. He presented an overall strategy for governing the state, and worked weekly and personally with representatives of both parties. That's what we desperately need in Washington DC. Negative ads by the campaigns and PAC's distort the records and policies of candidates. This is especially true in the case of the attacks on Gov. Romney. For those uncommitted voters, or those wavering in their support of President Obama, please take a new look at Gov. Mitt Romney. He deserves our vote. He will be the leader we're looking for to restore our economy and make the American Dream possible for all Americans. Janet BrownRye

Did Obama serve?

To the editor: Tom Chase, we thank you for your service to the Country.You fault Mr. Romney for not serving in our volunteer armed forces.Perhaps I missed something. What branch did Mr. Obama serve in?John JohnstoneRochester

Revealing

To the editor: The first Presidential debate not only revealed clear differences in the candidates' proposed programs and policies, but also stark differences in personality and attitude towards their fellow Americans. Perhaps most surprising was former Massachusetts Governor Romney's stance. He was aggressive and borderline rude, interrupting the moderator numerous times. He came off as a man who is used to getting what he wants, and will try to bulldoze his way to victory. Romney's aggression won't work, because the specifics of his proposal are alarming. Most Americans know how dangerous it would be to gut Medicare, leaving everyone under age 55 vulnerable. Also, millions of Americans who are benefitting from expanded healthcare coverage are not happy with his opposition to the Affordable Care Act. Romney would reverse ObamaCare's positive benefits such as guaranteed preventative care, coverage of preexisting conditions, and extended coverage for children. By contrast, at the debate, President Obama conveyed empathy for those of us who are worried about health care, retirement, and our children's future. He understands the perspective of the typical, ordinary American due to his personal experience. Moreover, he cares about the safety net, knowing that most of us will eventually rely on guaranteed healthcare services. I don't resent Romney for being rich. I do take offense, however, at his assumption that people under age 55 don't care about what will be waiting for them when we retire. I am also disturbed by his dismissal of the landmark healthcare act, a bipartisan measure that was eventually upheld by the Supreme Court. Romney is out of touch with the average American, and I won't buy into his gamble with my future.Julia RodriguezDurham

Misleading

To the editor: Following the first Presidential Debate, political pundits noted that Mitt Romney performed at the top of his game. He was well rehearsed and aggressive, but were his assertions true? Fact-checkers say many were not.Romney claimed that President Obama had doubled the deficit. This simply is not true. When President Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office had already projected a deficit for FY 2009 of $1.2 trillion. (It ended up being $1.4 trillion.) For FY 2012, the deficit is expected to be $1.1 trillion — below the level in the year he took office. Thus the deficit has actually declined significantly — during the worst of times.President Obama claimed that Romney has proposed a $5 trillion tax cut. Romney repeatedly denied this. However, fact-checkers say it is true that Romney has proposed cutting all marginal tax rates by 20 percent — which would cut tax revenue by $5 trillion. To make up that revenue, Mr. Romney has said he wants to clear out deductions and loopholes from the tax code, but he has not yet specified how he would do this. If he does have a plan, what is he waiting for?Romney claimed that “ObamaCare” would result in “a federal takeover of health care.” Actually, the Affordable Care Act builds on the foundation of private health insurance, providing subsidies for millions of low- and moderate-income people so they can purchase private insurance. Thirty million Americans are expected to gain health coverage, many through the expansion of Medicaid. The federal government would also subsidize the purchase of private insurance for millions of people with incomes up to four times the poverty level (up to $92,200 for a family of four). Private insurers would thus have many new customers. This is hardly “a government takeover.”Romney's frequently attacked President Obama for a cut $716 billion from Medicare, suggesting that the Medicare reductions would come from current beneficiaries. Fact-checkers have repeatedly debunked this claim, but Romney continues this one-liner. Romney neglected mentioning that his running-mate, Paul Ryan, included the identical savings in his budget plan.Romney needs to stop misleading the American people.Beth OlshanskyDurham

In response

To the editor: This in reply to representative candidate StanleyMister Stanley: Again, In case you missed my positions, which are embedded in fact (see joepitre.com for relevant links), I suggest you study the issues and focus on the facts of the Democrat (which is part of Ex-Rep Burke's documented record at the NH General Court website) 2010-2011 ($11.5 billion) budget as compared to the 2008-2009 ($9.3 billion) budget. There was an increase of 24% in spending and Governor Lynch campaigned on a 70 million dollar surplus, which in fact, revealed a $691 million to $1 billion deficit. (See Dem Rep Rosenwald recent comments) New Hampshire had the highest corporate tax rate in the country under the Democrat watch.(Now 46th) New Hampshire has the highest property tax rate as measured by percentage of income. There was no downshifting by the NH House to cities and towns. There was a vote by the New Hampshire Retirement Board to increase rate of contributions due to overestimated revenue from the retirement trust. In Governor Lynch's proposed budget, he had downshifted cost of nearly $200 million. We saved his bacon on that note!I believe in a hand up, not a hand out.Your Democrat policies have crippled the economy (record foreclosure rate in Strafford County). The number of working folk in New Hampshire is significantly less and we have no measure of the underemployed.Mr. Stanley and Ex-Rep Burke; Education is the cornerstone of our society. Why do we never see you at School Board meetings or voting at School District meetings? As a member of the School Board for over 5 years, and never missed a meeting. My 98% attendance record at the NH House reflects a similar dedication.We received a mandate in 2010 to reduce taxes (delivered) reduce the size of government (delivered). It takes a while to repay a Democrat spending spree.On Nov. 6 vote Pitre and Luciani to continue to reduce spending and not panic and increase taxes. I thank the voters for their great support.Ballot Constitutional Questions: Yes to prohibit income tax and yes to restore 73-a Amendment to ConstitutionState Rep. Joe PitreStrafford D3Farmington

About jobs

To the editor: Jobs, Jobs, Jobs everyone agrees on this. We want more jobs for Rochester to continue the recovery from the Great Recession. But what is the issue today in Rochester and the state that has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country. “We know that while the unemployment rate has improved, it is still higher than the historical average. But it is not clear whether unemployment is high because workers lack the necessary skills, or because many employers are reluctant to hire in a still weakened economy because of low demand.” (New England Partnership Report, May 2012.) Within the frame work that our state has had a net out- migration over the last four years why do we not have fuller employment? A. Our industries are currently running at full employment because of maximum use of technology which means high productivity and fewer workers. B. On the other hand, many high tech jobs are unfilled do so do to lack of qualified employees. (The highest rate of unemployment is in low skilled worker pool.) C. We have limited demand for the unskilled worker especially in construction- No demand for new housing or plants. Government infrastructure employment is drying up due the drying up of stimulus funding. (Remember in a six months the big Spaulding turnpike project will end.)The Rochester Development Office working with the Democratic governor and $4.5 million dollar federal loan brought in Saffran USA which will employ 400 workers over the objective of Rochester Republicans. The NH-DRED commissioner said “we commend the city of Rochester in bring in this quality Company….” This would not have happened if you did not pay in with your tax dollars. At the same time, the new Republican state budget cut the tobacco tax with no resulting increase in tobacco sales- money for job training. Republicans cut job training programs by giving the UNH system it biggest budget cut in history at the very time UNH is struggling to complete the new Paul Business School addition, a major component in training highly skilled workers. $70 million dollars is unavailable to fund our state government today because of the decisions made by Gov. Benson in 2004. Remember the theory, “you got to spend money to make money”? The Republicans praise themselves on the biggest state budget cut in recent memory but the revenue projections have not come through to help build jobs. David P. MillerN.H. House Candidate Wards 2-3, Rochester

About Cataldo

To the editor: As a distinguished member of the New Hampshire House, Sam Cataldo, worked hard for his constituents and the residents of the state fighting to protect and enhance the New Hampshire Advantage of — low taxes, low spending and less regulation. Through his legislative efforts a number of the liberal job-killing taxes were repealed and the budget was balanced without any gimmicks. This is why I believe that you should join me in supporting his candidacy to be the next State Senator representing District 6 that includes the city of Rochester and the towns of Farmington, New Durham, Alton, Barnstead and Gilmanton. I know first hand Sam's integrity, independence and fierce desire to protect our fundamental rights including our second amendment rights. Sam believes in protecting our environment, promoting renewable energy resources, and attending to the needs of our senior citizens. These are all values that I am sure you as the voters in District 6 would also share with Sam.Please vote on Tuesday, Nov. 6, and when you do please cast a vote for Sam Cataldo to be the next State Senator for District 16.David BoutinState Senator District 16Manchester

Differing views

To the editor: In response to Foster's Editorial “What Carol Shea-Porter is not…”: Congressman Guinta and Congresswoman Shea-Porter have differing views on government and government's role in supporting veterans. Guinta believes in a smaller government that indirectly supports veterans. Guinta voted for the VOW to Hire Heroes Act that gives tax incentives to businesses that hire unemployed veterans, and he has hosted a veterans job fair. Veterans job fairs are indeed useful; I organized one coinciding with New Hampshire's “Welcome Home” End of the Iraq War Parade. While I or a mayor can host job fairs, only Congress can pass the $1 billion Veterans Job Corps Act that Republicans defeated because of their small government ideology. Likewise, in pursuit of smaller government, Guinta voted for the 2012 Ryan Budget, which cuts discretionary veterans programs by $11 billion.Shea-Porter believes government should directly support veterans. Shea-Porter cosponsored the Post-9/11 GI Bill, allowing recent veterans like myself to pursue our post-military dreams. She's responsible for prohibiting toxic military burn pits and forcing the VA to recognize that they may lead to the Agent Orange or Gulf War Syndrome of my generation. Furthermore, Shea-Porter supports the Veterans Jobs Corps Act.I subscribe to the view of a government that supports veterans directly with jobs, educational and health benefits, over an ideological one that relies on business to support veterans while cutting veterans programs. Guinta should return to Manchester and continue to host job fairs, and Shea-Porter should return to Washington so government can once again directly support veterans.Josh DentonFormer Captain and Iraqi Combat AdvisorPortsmouth

There are limits

To the editor: A number of us in the community are incredulous as to why the topic of voter identification remains contentious. The League of Women Voters and The American Civil Liberties Union believe it is an unnecessary inconvenience to provide proof of residency, going so far as to suggest it is an attempt to marginalize certain groups of voters. They see it as a concern without merit, because voting fraud has not proven itself to exist within New Hampshire. Simply providing your “word of honor” at the voting booths should be adequate. In the recent New Hampshire primary, a friend conveyed to me that he was standing in line to vote and overheard two UNH students behind him talking. They had just come from voting in Durham and were now going to vote in Dover, as well. I respectfully ask The League of Women Voters and the ACLU to suggest a method to avoid this scenario from occurring in the future, as apparently honor, like patience, has its limits.Randal HellerBarrington

Bad to worse

To the editor: Recent events in the Middle East have highlighted the significant differences between President Obama and his rival for office, Governor Romney. The President, working together with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has a proven record in foreign policy. He ended the war in Iraq, bringing troops home as he promised, and is working diligently to bring the Afghanistan war to a close. Both of these wars are messy and confusing — also both inherited from the previous administration — and the President has managed to wind down the conflicts, has stood up for important American values abroad, and diplomatically attended to fragile relations with other countries. On the other hand, Governor Romney goes from bad to worse when he tries his hand at diplomacy. Let's begin with the fact that Romney has no foreign policy experience whatsoever, having only served in state- level office for one term. Moreover, in campaigning Romney has betrayed his ignorance about world affairs and has proved himself an awkward, even ham-fisted representative of our nation. First, he insulted the British on a trip to London. Next, he evoked flashbacks of the cold war by asserting that Russia is our biggest threat. Then, adding insult to injury, he tried to exploit the tragic murder of the U.S. Ambassador in Libya, in an absurd attempt to make the President appear unpatriotic.In this rapidly changing, volatile world, we need the strong, steady, and thoughtful intelligence of President Obama.Julia RodriguezDurham